Skip to main content

ANALYSIS: Mind Our Language

The article "Mind Our Language" by Akash Poyam, published in The Caravan on August 9, 2019, explores the Koitur (Gond) community's efforts to reclaim and revitalize their linguistic identity through the creation of the first standardized Gondi dictionary. Below is an analysis of the content, focusing on its key themes, arguments, and implications:
Summary
The Koiturs, an Adivasi community in central India also known as Gonds, have historically faced linguistic suppression by the Indian state and colonial powers. In March 2018, the community, with support from Kannada University in Hampi, published a standardized Gondi dictionary—the first of its kind—following a series of workshops held between 2014 and 2017. This dictionary represents a significant step toward codifying the Gondi language, a Dravidian tongue spoken by over 30 lakh people across seven states. The article traces the historical marginalization of Gondi, the cultural importance of the language, and the broader socio-political implications of its revitalization, including demands for recognition in the Indian Constitution’s Eighth Schedule and aspirations for a Gondwana state.
Key Themes
  1. Linguistic Identity and Cultural Revival
    • The codification of Gondi is portrayed as an act of resistance against centuries of cultural erasure. The Koiturs identify themselves as "people" through the term "Koitur," rejecting the externally imposed label "Gond."
    • The dictionary project, driven by community workshops, is both a linguistic and cultural endeavor, fostering dialogue and celebrating Koitur traditions like jatra (ancestral gatherings) and Rela pata (Gondi songs).
    • The language is a repository of Koitur history, belief systems (e.g., Koya Punem religion), and knowledge, making its preservation critical to maintaining their identity.
  2. Historical Suppression and Marginalization
    • The article frames the decline of Gondi as a result of deliberate state policies, starting with the fall of the last Gond kingdom in the 18th century and continuing through British colonization and post-independence India.
    • The imposition of dominant languages like Hindi and the lack of recognition for Adivasi languages (only Bodo and Santhali are in the Eighth Schedule) are cited as tools of cultural genocide.
    • The division of Gondwana into multiple states after India’s independence further fragmented the Koitur community and eroded their linguistic unity.
  3. Political Dimensions
    • The revitalization of Gondi is linked to the demand for a Gondwana state, a political aspiration rooted in the 1940s with figures like Komaram Bheem. The language is seen as a unifying force for this movement.
    • The exclusion of Gondi from the Eighth Schedule—despite its widespread use—contrasts with the inclusion of Sanskrit (spoken by only 24,000 people), highlighting caste-based biases in state policy.
  4. Community-Led Efforts
    • The dictionary project exemplifies grassroots activism, with contributions from Koitur scholars (e.g., Motiravan Kangali), volunteers, and organizations like the Gondwana Mahasabha and CGNet Swara.
    • The workshops addressed regional variations in Gondi, standardizing it to bridge linguistic gaps caused by geographic fragmentation.
  5. Education and Future Prospects
    • Efforts to integrate Gondi into school curricula (e.g., in Madhya Pradesh, Telangana, and Odisha) aim to ensure its survival among younger generations.
    • The rediscovery of scripts like Masram and Gunjala Gondi reflects ongoing attempts to reclaim and document the language’s history.
Key Arguments
  • Language as a Marker of Indigenous Rights: The article asserts that the neglect of Gondi reflects a broader denial of Adivasi rights to land, resources, and self-determination. Linguistic exclusion has historically facilitated the alienation of Koitur territories.
  • Cultural Resilience: Despite systemic suppression, the Koitur community’s initiative to standardize Gondi demonstrates their resilience and agency in reclaiming their heritage.
  • State Bias and Inequality: The prioritization of languages like Hindi and Sanskrit over widely spoken indigenous languages like Gondi exposes the Indian state’s upper-caste, Brahminical bias.
Strengths of the Content
  • Rich Historical Context: The article provides a detailed timeline of Gondi’s decline and revival, from the Gond kingdoms (15th–18th centuries) to modern efforts, grounding the narrative in historical evidence.
  • Personal Perspective: Poyam’s reflections as a Koitur native from Surguja add authenticity and emotional depth, illustrating the personal stakes of linguistic loss and rediscovery.
  • Interdisciplinary Approach: The piece weaves together linguistics, anthropology, history, and politics, offering a holistic view of the issue.
  • Evidence-Based: References to scholars (e.g., Kangali, Bhukya), oral traditions, and colonial records lend credibility to the claims.
Limitations
  • Lack of Counterarguments: The article presents a strong case for Gondi’s revitalization but does not address potential challenges, such as logistical difficulties in standardizing a language with multiple dialects or opposition from state authorities.
  • Narrow Focus on Gondi: While Gondi is the focus, the article briefly mentions other endangered Adivasi languages (e.g., Mundari, Kurukh) without exploring their parallel struggles in depth.
  • Idealization of the Past: The portrayal of Gond kingdoms as a golden age of Gondi use might oversimplify the complexities of pre-colonial governance and linguistic diversity.
Broader Implications
  • Cultural Preservation: The Gondi dictionary sets a precedent for other indigenous communities in India and globally to document and revive endangered languages.
  • Political Empowerment: Linking language to the Gondwana state movement suggests that linguistic revival could strengthen territorial autonomy claims, potentially reshaping India’s federal structure.
  • Education Reform: The inclusion of Gondi in school curricula challenges the dominance of Hindi and English, advocating for a more inclusive educational framework.
Conclusion
"Mind Our Language" is a compelling narrative of resistance, identity, and community-driven change. It highlights the Koitur people’s efforts to reclaim their linguistic heritage against a backdrop of historical oppression, positioning the Gondi dictionary as both a cultural artifact and a political tool. The article underscores the inseparable link between language, identity, and rights, making a powerful case for recognizing Gondi—and by extension, other Adivasi languages—in India’s constitutional framework. For the Koiturs, this is not just about words; it’s about restoring a way of life.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Helen Mirren once said: Before you argue with someone, ask yourself.......

Helen Mirren once said: Before you argue with someone, ask yourself, is that person even mentally mature enough to grasp the concept of a different perspective. Because if not, there's absolutely no point. Not every argument is worth your energy. Sometimes, no matter how clearly you express yourself, the other person isn’t listening to understand—they’re listening to react. They’re stuck in their own perspective, unwilling to consider another viewpoint, and engaging with them only drains you. There’s a difference between a healthy discussion and a pointless debate. A conversation with someone who is open-minded, who values growth and understanding, can be enlightening—even if you don’t agree. But trying to reason with someone who refuses to see beyond their own beliefs? That’s like talking to a wall. No matter how much logic or truth you present, they will twist, deflect, or dismiss your words, not because you’re wrong, but because they’re unwilling to see another side. Maturity is...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why BJP is opposing the Telangana caste census?

The BJP opposes the Telangana caste census primarily due to concerns about its political motivations, alleging that the Congress party is using it for electoral gain rather than genuine welfare of Backward Classes (BCs)  1 3 .  BJP leaders argue that the census distracts from Congress's unfulfilled promises to BCs and could exacerbate social divisions  2 4 .  Additionally, there are fears within the BJP that a detailed caste enumeration might reveal ongoing upper-caste dominance in politics and society, which could challenge their support base  7 8 . The BJP's main arguments against the caste census include: Political Manipulation : BJP leaders assert that the Congress party is using the caste census for political advantage rather than for the welfare of Backward Classes (BCs), claiming it distracts from unfulfilled promises made to these communities  2 4 . Threat to Hindutva Agenda : The party views the census as a potential challenge to its support base a...
Post a Comment
Read more

JAI HIND: WHO DO WE OWE IT TO?

Though the origin of Jai Hind is usually ascribed to Chempakaraman  Pillai in 1907, it didn’t have a popular usage till Netaji Bose made it the standard greeting of the INA. How this happened to be has a Hyderabad connection. It is believed by Netaji’s close followers that the slogan "Jai Hind" as coined by Abid Hasan Safrani.   Abid Hasan Safrani  was the son of the soil of Hyderabad in India. His real name was Zainul Abedin Hasan. He preferred to be called Abid Hasan. His parents expired during the British Raj. Before that they had sent him to Germany instead of England for higher studies in Engineering stream. During the that time, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose visited Germany and addressed Indian  prisoners of war & also students and asked them  to join Indian National Army (Azad Hind Fauj). Abid Hasan met him and got inspired by the charisma of Netaji.  He told him that he would join him after finishing his studies. Netaji said tautingly t...
Post a Comment
Read more